[WikiEN-l] RK's latest complaint

[Charles Podles]

So, first a brief summary for those who couldn't stand

to read the entire whinge:

RK thinks that Anthere protected 
[[Palestinian views of the peace process]] on 
[[m:The Wrong Version]], as hard as she could, on
purpose, for no reason, and now he's telling on
her. 

Before I begin with the specifics, and the 
vitriolic sarcasm, I'll just note that Anthere's 
only edit to the page since its creation was her 
addition of the protection message, and her only 
edit to its talk page was this:

"Hi. Sorry guys, but it seems to me reversion war was
not a very good choice. Hence the protection.
SweetLittleFluffyThing 14:37, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)"

which edits seem to be entirely 
in line with [[Wikipedia:Protection policy]], and 
furthermore demonstrated good judgement by heading 
off an incipient revert war between yours truly
and RK.

Now then:

Robert wrote:
"Anthere has now clearly overstepped her authority.
She has picked one version of an article which deleted
and censored all info which did not agree with her her
anti-Zionist views, and then she protected the page.
This is outrageous behaviour from a Sysop."

http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wrong_Version, 
item 7: Anthere protected my revision of the 
article because we are both eeeevil anti-Zionists,
and. . .

Robert wrote:
"I understand that many people here hate Israel and
Jews who support it, that much has been clear for some
time. But such hatred is rarely so blatant as this: To
falsify history by deleting entire historical accounts
and quotes, to spin a fantastic pro-Arab, anti-Zionist
storyline, and to lock the article, is just too much."

. . . we both hate Israel, Jews, and truth itself. 
Of course. And I only reverted RK's edits to the 
article because of my extremist pro-Arab viewpoint;
I certainly didn't revert him because he annihilated
all but one of the dozens of edits made since 
January 20:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Palestinian_views_of_the_peace_process&diff=4070021&oldid=2223337

thus destroying the good-faith edits of numerous 
contributors, none of whom were or are vandals. No, 
my extreme pro-Arab opinions were the only reason
for my reverts. 

Moving on:

Robert wrote:

(<snip> a lengthy quote from Jimbo Wales, Supreme and 
Final Arbiter of All Article Content Disputes)

"It is a total violation of Wikipedia NPOV policy to
only mentioning viewpoints from a limited number of
people, in a limited number of situations. Palestinian
viewpoints that Anthere and Mirv disagree with, even
if they are majority views, are censored and deleted.
That is outrageous and dishonest."

That's one way of looking at it; other ways can 
be found on [[Talk:Palestinian views of the peace
process]] and its numerous archives. 

Robert wrote:
"It is also anti-Palestinian; Anthere and Mirv
are effectively saying 'You Palestinians can go fuck
yourselves'; we'll tell the world what you believe,
even if we have to erase your own quotes.'"

Wait. . . I thought I held extremist *pro*-Arab views?


Robert wrote:

"In contrast, the material they censored shows a wide
range of views from a wide range of Palestinian
leaders, so that Wikipedia readers can read the range
of views and make up their own mind. That, by
definition, is Wikipedia NPOV policy."

Perhaps we are using wildly different definitions of
"a wide range of views from a wide range of
Palestinian leaders", but the current (wrong) 
version of the article states everything from 

"The stated goal of Hamas and Palestinian 
Islamic Jihad is to overthrow Israel 
and replace it with an Islamic theocracy 
or Islamist state." 

to

"Arafat stated that 'The PLO recognizes 
the right of the State of Israel to exist 
in peace and security.'"

which seems, to my extremist pro-(or was it 
anti(?))-Arab eyes, to be a fairly wide range indeed.
But article content disputes belong on the article's
talk page, not the mailing list, eh. I'll see you
there, RK.

P.S. the proper place to discuss abuse of
administrative powers (if you had any complaint
worth making, which you don't) is either
[[Wikipedia:Requests for review of administrative
actions]], [[Wikipedia:Requests for comment]], or
(best of all) the sysop's talk page. 

--C. Podles ([[en:user:Mirv]])



	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/